JW child first pediatric patient to receive acute normovolemic hemodilution - 1970

by OrphanCrow 15 Replies latest watchtower medical

  • OrphanCrow
    OrphanCrow

    Acute Normovolemic Hemodilution

    Hemodilution simply refers to the process of diluting the blood with another substance. There are various ways that this is done before, during and after the surgical process. When the hemodilution is simply the additive of substance to the blood circulation to make up for volume loss during anemia, the process does not violate any so-called Biblical injunction against storing blood or taking foreign blood into the body.

    A doctor who changed that simple hemodilution process into one with a wider application, was Dr. Denton Cooley, the heart surgeon. He developed a heart and lung machine that would divert the blood supply away from the heart and replace the diverted blood with non-blood fluid, making open heart surgery possible. At the time that he first used this machine, he discovered that priming the machine with donated blood was problematic for various reasons and in response, Cooley came up with a way to prime the machine with non-blood product. A side benefit to the non-blood prime was that JW patients consented to the procedure, as long as the blood wasn't removed and stored prior to the surgery starting and the bags of stored blood during the surgical procedure remain attached to the body. A simple concession (that really, was actually meaningless) facilitated this early autologous blood transfusion procedure for JWs.

    Dr. Cooley's hemodilution procedures were being pioneered in the late 1960s and the process of removing large amounts of blood prior to and during surgery for re-infusion became to be known as 'acute normovolemic hemodilution'.

    In 1970, this procedure was tried on a child for the first time:

    Acute Normovolemic Hemodilution
    The use of a child's acutely collected blood for reinfusion after surgery was first applied in the US by Myron B. Laver, M.D. in 1970 at the Massachusetts General Hospital. The initial patient was a 7 year old child requiring open heart surgery whose family was committed to refusing blood use on religious grounds.

    The medical study that reported this procedure is not available online - Laver, M. B., and M. J. Buckley. "EXTREME HEMODILUTION IN SURGICAL PATIENTS." MICROVASCULAR RESEARCH. Vol. 4. No. 2. 525 B ST, STE 1900, SAN DIEGO, CA 92101-4495: ACADEMIC PRESS INC, 1972.

    However, The story of the child and his family was reported on in the January 18, 1971 issue of Newsweek.

    The child in this procedure was Terry Johnson, a Jehovah's Witness child. His parents, Mr. and Mrs. Robert Johnson of Athol, Mass., refused blood for Terry and even threatened to not take Terry back home if a court order was obtained to treat him with blood.

    The doctors finally came up with a plan that met with approval and this is what happened during the surgery:

    Terry's operation was on Oct. 1. During the one and a haf hours he was on the heart-lung machine, 6 pints of Ringer's lactate were administered through his right arm, diluting the red cells in his circulation from 60 percent down to 10 percent. "His blood was thin enough to pass the headline test,"notes Laver. "You could read headlines through it." To compensate for the lack of oxygen-carrying red blood cells, the doctors speeded up his circulation with the pump, making the red cells do double duty. When the surgeons had repaired Terry's heart, the pump was switched off and the blood in the plastic bags flowed back into his body. The Ringer's lactate was excreted normally. Soon, Terry's red bloods were back to normal and since the clotting ability of his blood was unimpaired, his recovery was uneventful.

    And that was the first successful acute normovolemic hemodilution to be done on a child. Terry Johnson got to go home with his parents - the same parents who would not have taken him home if he had received life saving blood.

    That procedure was done in 1970, reported on in Newsweek in 1971 and written about in a medical journal.

    The Newsweek article was included in the WTS publication directed towards the medical profession: Jehovah's Witnesses Alternatives to Blood Transfusions 1973.

    The WTS also wrote about this new procedure in Awake! 1972 Apr 8 p.30:

    The Journal of the American Medical Association, dated Nov 15, 1971, described a procedure for open-heart surgery that employs "sever hemodilution." Early in the operation a large quantity of blood is drawn off into a plastic blood bag. Though the bag is left connected to the patient by a tube, the removed and stored blood is no longer circulating in the patient's system. It is replaced with a plasma volume expander, which dilutes the blood remaining in the veins and which gradually dissipates during the operative procedure. Near the conclusion of the operation the blood storage bag is elevated, and the stored blood is reinfused into the patient. The New York Times of Nov 9, 1971, reported on a somewhat similar procedure whereby some days before one undergoes surgery as much as four pints of blood are removed and stored. During the operation the person's own stored blood is transfused back into him, thus avoiding the danger of disease and mismatched blood. These techniques are noteworthy to Christians, since they run counter to God's Word. The Bible shows that blood is not to be taken out of a body, stored and then later reused.

    For years, the Watchtower's references to hemodilution in their literature consistently said that blood storage outside the body was forbidden. Hemodilution was not actually forbidden, as long as it was just the simple process of adding fluid to the bloodstream to compensate for blood loss.

    The WTS does not name the procedure that was approved - ANH with line attached.

    Acute normovolemic hemodilution would not receive approval in the WTS literature until 1995.

  • Anders Andersen
    Anders Andersen

    Wow, you're digging deep!

    Great find and write up. Thanks!

    Are you planning on presenting/publishing your research somehow?

  • OrphanCrow
    OrphanCrow
    AndersAnderson: Wow, you're digging deep!
    Great find and write up. Thanks!
    Are you planning on presenting/publishing your research somehow?

    Thanks Anders.

    I have had the Newsweek article for several years but it has taken me this long to put all the pieces together. Just learning about what all the medical procedures are is a daunting endeavor and then wading through medical studies and making timelines and connections is really complicated.

    About publishing - I know, I know...I get that suggestion a lot.

    I don't feel like I am ready. Not yet. I keep finding new material and I feel like I am missing pieces. Publishing now would be like framing a puzzle but not putting the last three pieces in the picture.

    I "publish" what I find on these forums and hope that the material I unearth is useful to someone somewhere...sometime. I don't like the idea of holding information back. Maybe someday I will be able to put it all together but in the meantime, I will just keep plugging away and sharing what I find.

  • JWdaughter
    JWdaughter

    They threatened to not take their child home if he was given blood? I fault the state agency that didn't rescue the child from such abuse. Totally monstrous parents.

  • Dagney
    Dagney

    Thank you for the information OC...fascinating!

    The WT are painting themselves into a well deserved corner with the blood issue.

  • OrphanCrow
    OrphanCrow
    jwdaughter: They threatened to not take their child home if he was given blood? I fault the state agency that didn't rescue the child from such abuse. Totally monstrous parents.

    The situation happened in 1970, at a time that the courts had had some experience with dealing with the blood ban, but there were other circumstances that influenced the doctors' behavior. This is how it was written in the Newsweek article:


    The doctors considered going to court to obtain temporary custody of the boy so that they could operate without his parents' consent, an alternative that had been used periodically in other Jehovah's witness cases. Then the Johnson's proclaimed that they would not take Terry back into their home if such a course was taken. In the face of this, plus some adverse comment in the local press, the doctors sent Terry back home while they pondered other ways to solve the dilemna. "The parents were very calm and reasonable, even though they were insistent on a strict interpretation of their religious rules," recalls heart surgeon Dr. Mortimer J. Buckley. "We were willing to bend over backward."

    I am curious as to what the "adverse comment in the local press" was. The WTS has a history of 'spiking' popular opinion by submitting articles to the media and it would fit their pattern if that adverse media had been provoked by the WTS themselves.

    Dagney: The WT are painting themselves into a well deserved corner with the blood issue.

    And I am happy to pick up a brush to make sure the job is done. Hell, I will even buy the paint.

    I think their corner on the bloodless market might be getting a little small lately. In spite of the hype that the WTS has circulated concerning bloodless surgery, I have a feeling that their well laid plans for the golden standard of care could be faltering right about........now.

    I am not sure that all those bloodless clinics that the JWs started in the States over the past couple decades have enough patients to keep them viable. Instead of an expansion into the bloodless world, I have a sneaking suspicion that we will be seeing some of them close their doors in the not too distant future.

    Bloodless surgery options do not perform as well as the WTS noblood crew would like people to believe.

  • Vidiot
    Vidiot

    OrphanCrow - "...and even threatened to not take Terry back home if a court order was obtained to treat him with blood."

    F**king pinheads.

    Even the Org's had enough brains to realize (and advise the R&F) that if the state mandated a transfusion to a minor patient, the kid shouldn't be punished.

    Makes you wonder what Terry Johnson thought of his parents' views by the time he was older and learned the whole story.

  • OrphanCrow
    OrphanCrow
    vidiot: Makes you wonder what Terry Johnson thought of his parents' views by the time he was older and learned the whole story.

    That has crossed my mind, too, vidiot.

    Terry would be 53 years old now. I would like to know if he is still alive.

  • Lee Elder
    Lee Elder

    Very interesting bit of history, which demonstrates how hard doctors have worked with JWs and the Watchtower to try and save lives. That has certainly pushed the technology forward, but that progress has come at the cost of too many lives as you know. Well done.

  • OrphanCrow
    OrphanCrow
    Lee Elder: ...demonstrates how hard doctors have worked with JWs and the Watchtower to try and save lives. That has certainly pushed the technology forward

    Lee, I don't agree with that statement. In fact, I would argue that the no blood doctrine has held technology back. The no blood doctrine has tied the hands of doctors who have wanted to help them but couldn't. The technology to save lives was already in place but the doctors couldn't use a lot of the technology that the rest of the population could - note that the heart lung machine could have easily been used months before on Terry yet the doctors weren't allowed to use it until the WTS' demands were met.

    The single most influential procedure that has progressed surgery to the place we have it today is blood transfusions, NOT the refusal of blood.

    As much as the Watchtower would like people to believe that the advances in the surgical technology came about because of them, it simply isn't true. Those advances were already happening and the JWs were just lucky enough to ride in on the back of technology that was designed and developed because of blood transfusions and the modifications that they demanded from medical professionals did NOT help the technology to advance. It impeded it.

    If it were the case that the JWs' requests advanced the technology, then all ANH procedures would do it the way the JWs demand - with the lines still attached, etc. They don't. The JWs are the only ones who still insist on using a less than satisfactory way of administering ANH. The JW approach to medicine is not optimal.

    And yes, a whole bunch of people have died following the WTS' medical advice. A whole bunch. There is nothing that can make up for that. Nothing. Saying that medical knowledge was advanced because of those deaths (sorry...but I have to be honest here) is just a regurgitation of the Watchtower myth. It isn't true. It never will be true.

    *to add - I need to modify my statement about the advancement of medical knowledge. What the JWs have contributed is an awareness of what doesn't work. Fluosol-DA didn't work - it was pulled off the market (tested on the JW population). Hemopure didn't work - it was pulled off the market (except for JWs). Hetastarch didn't work - it has limited use and a FDA warning...but is still used by JWs

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit